Consumer motivation and ability to process health claims

Faculty of Bioscience Engineering

Academic year 2012– 2013

Consumer motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols

Yung, Hung

Promoter : Prof. Dr. Ir. Wim Verbeke

Co-promoter : Dr. Ir. Christine Hoefkens

Master’s dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in Human Nutrition and Rural Development

Main subject: Human Nutrition

Deze pagina is niet beschikbaar omdat ze persoonsgegevens bevat.Universiteitsbibliotheek Gent, 2021.

This page is not available because it contains personal information.Ghent University, Library, 2021.

ii

ABSTRACT

In order to improve consumers' food choices and encourage the European food

industry to provide healthier food products, the EC Regulation 1924/2006 came into

force in January 2007 to support scientifically-sound nutrition and health claims on

food products. However, the legislation alone is insufficient, as the actual effects are

highly dependent on the perceptions and behaviour of consumers.

Serving as a pilot study for the CLYMBOL project -- “Role of health-related claims and

symbols in consumer behaviour”, a cross-sectional web-based survey in Belgium

(Flanders) (N = 565) was carried out. This study aimed to investigate consumers'

motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols, and examined the

changes in their reactions towards these food products bearing health claims in the

past six years.

The results indicated that consumers' motivation and perceived ability to process

health claims and symbols varied according to consumers' characteristics such as

their awareness of the link between diet and health, their current use of health

claims and symbols, familiarity with the specific functional foods, socio-demographic

background and diet-related medical history, as well as their reactions, in terms of

perceived credibility and purchase intention, to functional foods bearing a health

claim or symbol. Consumers' perceptions of health claims and symbols as marketing

gimmicks significantly lowered their motivation, but were not related to their ability.

The ability in terms of objective understanding was not associated to the motivation

nor other consumers' characteristics and reactions; this ability was only related to

their socio-demographic background.

With the changing regulatory climate in the last six years, consumers showed a lower

intention to purchase the functional products bearing a health claim. The

implications of these findings for policymakers and the food industry are also

discussed.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This dissertation would have remained a dream had it not been for many wonderful

and kind people around me, to only some of whom it is possible to give particular

mention here.

I wish to thank, first and foremost, Prof. Wim Verbeke for granting me this valuable

opportunity to learn and gain practical experience in his department, as well as his

inspiring teaching and feedback.

It is with immense gratitude that I acknowledge the guidance, support and

assistance from Dr. Christine Hoefkens along the way. Words are inadequate for

thanking her. It is one of the greatest blessings encountered in my life to have such

an amazing coach, an intelligent, helpful, kind teacher.

I am indebted to Ghent University and its staff for the financial, academic and

technical support which I received, particularly the award of Master Grants that

provided the necessary financial aids for my studies. I owe my deepest gratitude to

my programme coordinator, Ir. Anne-Marie Remaut-De Winter for her valuable,

useful, and important advice and assistance, without which I would not have

obtained the Master Grants nor many more academic achievements.

I am thankful to my many good friends from HuRuDe and flatmates at Home

Boudewijn who supported me and made the learning experiences wonderful and full

of joys.

Last but not least, I would not have made it to where I am without my parents, who

instilled into me a love of creative pursuits, science and languages, and filled me with

courage and love.

Thanks and praises be to God for putting these amazing people around me, and

giving me the privilege to pursue this master programme with inner strength and

wisdom.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COPYRIGHT ...................................................................................................................... i

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... ii

ANOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ viii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Research objectives............................................................................................ 1

1.2 Justification ........................................................................................................ 1

1.3 Research questions ............................................................................................ 2

1.4 Research hypotheses ......................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................. 4

2.1 The role of EU legislation on health claims and symbols in the promotion of

healthy eating .................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Processing of health claims and symbols ........................................................... 5

2.2.1 Motivation to process ............................................................................ 5

2.2.2 Ability to process .................................................................................... 6

2.2.2.1 Subjective understanding .............................................................. 7

2.2.2.2 Objective understanding ................................................................ 7

2.2.3 Relation between motivation and ability ............................................... 7

2.3 Consumers' reactions towards health claims and symbols ............................... 8

2.3.1 Perceived credibility and purchase intention ........................................ 8

2.4 Consumers' characteristics influencing their processing of and reactions to

health claims and symbols ................................................................................. 8

2.4.1 Socio-demographic background............................................................. 9

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 10

3.1 Study design ..................................................................................................... 10

3.1.1 Pre-testing and study protocol ............................................................. 10

3.1.2 Sampling and data collection ............................................................... 10

v

3.2 Measures .......................................................................................................... 10

3.2.1 Dependent variables ............................................................................ 12

3.2.1.1 Motivation to process health claims and symbols ...................... 12

3.2.1.2 Ability to process health claims and symbols .............................. 12

3.2.1.3 Consumers' reactions in terms of perceived credibility and

purchase intention of product concepts .................................... 12

3.2.2 Independent variables .......................................................................... 13

3.2.2.1 Consumers' characteristics influencing processing of and

reactions towards health claims and symbols ............................ 13

3.3 Data analysis .................................................................................................... 14

3.3.1 Data cleaning and recoding .................................................................. 14

3.3.2 New constructs of variables and reliability test ................................... 14

3.3.3 Descriptive statistics ............................................................................. 15

3.3.4 Statistical analysis ................................................................................. 15

3.3.4.1 Assumptions and mean comparison............................................ 15

3.3.4.2 Correlations .................................................................................. 16

3.3.4.3 Chi-square statistics ..................................................................... 16

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ................................................................................................... 17

4.1 Descriptive statistics ........................................................................................ 17

4.1.1 Socio-demographic background........................................................... 17

4.1.2 Background attitudes ........................................................................... 18

4.1.3 Product familiarity ................................................................................ 18

4.1.4 Consumers' reactions towards health claims and symbols ................. 18

4.1.4.1 Perceived credibility ..................................................................... 18

4.1.4.2 Purchase intention ....................................................................... 19

4.1.5 Motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols ............. 20

4.2 Relations between consumers' characteristics and the level of motivation and

ability to process health claims and symbols ................................................... 21

4.2.1 Awareness of the link between diet and health .................................. 21

4.2.2 Current usage of health claims and symbols ....................................... 22

4.2.3 Perception of validity ........................................................................... 23

4.2.4 Familiarity with specific functional food product concepts ................. 24

vi

4.2.4.1 Familiarity with calcium-enriched fruit juice ............................... 24

4.2.4.2 Familiarity with fibre-enriched breakfast cereals ........................ 25

4.2.4.3 Familiarity with omega-3-enriched spread .................................. 26

4.2.5 Diet-related medical history ................................................................. 27

4.2.6 Gender .................................................................................................. 28

4.2.7 Age ........................................................................................................ 28

4.2.8 Education level ..................................................................................... 30

4.2.9 Special diet status ................................................................................. 31

4.2.10 Role in the households ......................................................................... 32

4.3 Relations between consumers' motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols ..................................................................................................... 33

4.4 Relations between consumers' reactions and the level of motivation and

ability to process health claims and symbols ................................................... 34

4.4.1 Perceived credibility of the product concepts ..................................... 34

4.4.1.1 Perceived credibility of calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing

health claim and symbol ............................................................. 34

4.4.1.2 Perceived credibility of fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing


4.4.1.3 Perceived credibility of omega-3-enriched spread bearing health

claim and symbol ........................................................................ 38

4.4.2 Purchase intention of the product concepts ....................................... 40

4.4.2.1 Purchase intention of calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing health

claim and symbol ........................................................................ 40

4.4.2.2 Purchase intention of fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing


4.4.2.3 Purchase intention of omega-3-enriched spread bearing health

claim and symbol ........................................................................ 44

4.5 Changes in consumers’ reactions towards health claims six years after

implementation of the Regulation ................................................................... 47

4.5.1 Perceived credibility of product concepts with health claims ............. 47

4.5.2 Purchase intention of product concepts with health claims ............... 47

4.5.3 Differences in socio-demographic characteristics of the samples in the

previous and follow-up study ............................................................... 48

vii

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ............................................................................................. 49

5.1 Consumers' motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols ..... 49

5.1.1 Consumers' background attitudes ....................................................... 49

5.1.2 Familiarity ............................................................................................. 50

5.1.3 Socio-demographic background........................................................... 51

5.1.4 Relation between motivation and ability ............................................. 52

5.2 Consumers’ reactions towards health claims and symbols ............................. 52

5.2.1 Relation to motivation and ability ........................................................ 52

5.3 The change of consumers' reactions six years after the implementation of EC

Regulation 1924/2006 ...................................................................................... 53

5.4 Practical implications ....................................................................................... 53

5.5 Limitations of the study and future research .................................................. 54

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 56

REFERENCE ................................................................................................................... 57

APPENDIX A: Survey......................................................................................................I

APPENDIX B: Dataset and statistics outputs...............................................................XI

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. AN EXAMPLE OF POSSIBLE HEALTH SYMBOLS ON THE LABELS OF FOOD PRODUCTS ..... 4

FIGURE 2. A THEORETICAL MODEL FOR THE EFFECTS OF NUTRITION INFORMATION SHOWN ON

FOOD LABELS ON CUSTOMERS’ INFORMATION PROCESSING AND USE .......................... 6

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. PRODUCT CONCEPTS (I.E. CARRIER–ENRICHMENT–CLAIM OR SYMBOL) USED AS

EXAMPLE ......................................................................................................................... 11

TABLE 2. THE RELIABILITY TESTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTS OF VARIABLES ...................................... 14

TABLE 3. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS (MEAN ± SD) AND (N (%)) (N = 565) ............. 17

TABLE 4. BACKGROUND ATTITUDES (MEAN ± SD) (N = 565) .......................................................... 18

TABLE 5. PRODUCT FAMILIARITY TOWARDS THE PRODUCT CONCEPTS (MEAN ± SD) (N = 565) ... 18

TABLE 6. PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY TOWARDS THE PRODUCT CONCEPTS WITH HEALTH CLAIMS

AND SYMBOLS (MEAN ± SD) (N = 565) ........................................................................... 19

TABLE 7. PURCHASE INTENTION TOWARDS THE PRODUCT CONCEPTS WITH HEALTH CLAIMS AND

SYMBOLS (MEAN ± SD) (N = 565).................................................................................... 19

TABLE 8. MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS (MEAN ± SD)

(N = 565) ......................................................................................................................... 20

TABLE 9. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' DIET-HEALTH AWARENESS AND THEIR

MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ..................... 21

TABLE 10. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' CURRENT USAGE OF AND THEIR MOTIVATION

AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ............................................ 22

TABLE 11. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEPTION OF VALIDITY OF AND THEIR


TABLE 12. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' FAMILIARITY WITH CALCIUM-ENRICHED FRUIT

JUICE AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND

SYMBOLS ......................................................................................................................... 24

TABLE 13. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' FAMILIARITY WITH FIBRE-ENRICHED BREAKFAST

CEREALS AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND

SYMBOLS. ........................................................................................................................ 25

ix

TABLE 14. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' FAMILIARITY WITH OMEGA-3-ENRICHED SPREAD

AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS .. 26

TABLE 15. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE PRESENCE OF DIET-RELATED MEDICAL HISTORY AND THEIR


TABLE 16. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' GENDER AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO

PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ...................................................................... 28

TABLE 17. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' AGE AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO


TABLE 18. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' EDUCATION LEVEL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND

ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS .................................................... 30

TABLE 19. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' SPECIAL DIET STATUS AND THEIR MOTIVATION

AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ............................................ 31

TABLE 20. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' ROLE IN THE HOUSEHOLDS AND THEIR


TABLE 21. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH

CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ................................................................................................... 33

TABLE 22. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF CALCIUM-ENRICHED

FRUIT JUICE BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO

PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS. ..................................................................... 34

TABLE 23. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF CALCIUM-ENRICHED

FRUIT JUICE BEARING HEALTH SYMBOL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO


TABLE 24. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF FIBRE-ENRICHED

BREAKFAST CEREALS BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY

TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ................................................................. 36

TABLE 25. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF FIBRE-ENRICHED

BREAKFAST CEREALS BEARING HEALTH SYMBOLS AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND

ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS .................................................... 37

TABLE 26. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF OMEGA-3-ENRICHED

SPREAD BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS

HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS ...................................................................................... 38

x

TABLE 27. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF OMEGA-3-ENRICHED

SPREAD BEARING HEALTH SYMBOL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS


TABLE 28. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF CALCIUM-ENRICHED

FRUIT JUICE BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO


TABLE 29. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF CALCIUM-ENRICHED

FRUIT JUICE BEARING HEALTH SYMBOL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO


TABLE 30. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF FIBRE-ENRICHED

BREAKFAST CEREALS BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY


TABLE 31. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF FIBRE-ENRICHED

BREAKFAST CEREALS BEARING HEALTH SYMBOL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY


TABLE 32. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF OMEGA-3-ENRICHED

SPREAD BEARING HEALTH CLAIM AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS


TABLE 33. RELATIONS BETWEEN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF OMEGA-3-ENRICHED

SPREAD BEARING HEALTH SYMBOL AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS


TABLE 34. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN CONSUMERS’

MOTIVATION AND ABILITY TO PROCESS HEALTH CLAIMS AND SYMBOLS, AND

CONSUMERS' CHARACTERISTICS AND REACTIONS TOWARDS THESE CLAIMS AND

SYMBOLS ......................................................................................................................... 46

TABLE 35. CHANGES IN CONSUMERS' PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF PRODUCT CONCEPTS BEARING

HEALTH CLAIMS IN FOLLOW-UP STUDY COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS STUDY ............ 47

TABLE 36. CHANGES IN CONSUMERS' PURCHASE INTENTION OF PRODUCT CONCEPTS BEARING

HEALTH CLAIMS IN FOLLOW-UP STUDY COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS STUDY ............ 48

TABLE 37. DIFFERENCES IN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLES IN THE

PREVIOUS AND FOLLOW-UP STUDY ............................................................................... 48

xi

L IST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ANOVA Analysis of Variances

EC European Commission

e.g. Exempli gratia (for example)

EFSA European Food Safety Agency

EUFIC European Food Information Council

etc. Et cetera (and so forth)

FLABEL Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life

H Hypothesis

N Total sample size

n Subsample size

P Page (number)

p-value Probability value

Q Question

SD Standard Deviation

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research objectives

The objectives of this research study are to determine Belgian consumers'

motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols, as well as to examine

changes in consumers' reactions towards functional foods bearing health claims,

before and after the implementation of EC Regulation 1924/2006 (henceforth, ‘the

Regulation’). The study will serve as a pilot study for the CLYMBOL project -- “Role of

health-related claims and symbols in consumer behaviour”, which is a recently

funded project within FP7 of the European Commission (FP7-KBBE-6-2012-311963).

The overall objective of the project is to give future direction for the development of

health claims and symbols to strengthen informed choice and healthy eating.

1.2 Justification

The increase in consumer awareness of the relation between nutrition and health

has been a key driver underpinning both functional food development and

regulatory changes (American Dietetic Association, 2006). The Regulation came into

force in January 2007, supporting scientifically-sound nutrition and health claims on

food products, requiring that health claims be stringently regulated and standardized,

while health symbols are not (European Commission, 2007). The overall aim of the

Regulation is to help consumers make more informed and eventually healthier food

choices, and encourage European food industries to provide healthier food products.

However, the availability of health claims and symbols from a scientific perspective is

insufficient, as their actual effects depend on the interaction with consumers and

their resulting behaviour (Hieke & Taylor, 2012; Grunert & Wills, 2007; Moorman,

1990). Qualitative research suggested that consumers in general were not nutrition

experts (Bech-Larsen & Scholderer, 2007), and they had different characteristics,

such as diet-health awareness, use of and perception of the validity of health claims

and symbols, familiarity with specific functional food products, socio-demographic

background, special diet status and medical history, which could influence their

levels of information acquisition (Moorman, 1990).

Though functional foods promise health benefits beyond basic nutrition, consumers

are generally sceptical about the reliability of functional foods, as well as health

claims and symbols (William, 2005). Food industries can never take consumers'

acceptance of food products with health claims and/or symbols for granted (Verbeke,

2010). Up-to-date understanding of consumer perception gives competitive

advantages in the market, in which the food industries could have more strategic

2

targeting with respect to customization and innovation (Zimmer et al., 2010).

Furthermore, since it is a very costly, lengthy and often disappointing process to

substantiate claims and get approved under the current EU legislation (Verbeke,

2010), it is very important to determine how motivated and capable consumers are

to process these claims, and how they react to them. Hence, gaining consumer

insights may enable food industries to determine how worthwhile it is to invest in

continued research to scientifically substantiate these claims, as well as to provide

policy makers with a useful tool for designing public health programs that truly

benefit consumers (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2011).

Previous studies have invariably stressed the need for further research. With a time

interval of six years, consumers have had the opportunity to become more familiar

with specific functional foods and the health claims and symbols on the labels

(Verbeke, 2010). With the implementation of the Regulation, it would be the

appropriate time to conduct a study that clears uncertainties at the industrial as well

as governmental level, and to respond to the scepticism expressed by researchers

towards the potential for the new legislation to promote healthy food choices and

improve consumption behaviour (Bech-Larsen & Scholderer, 2007).

1.3 Research questions

Main questions

How motivated and capable are consumers to process health claims and symbols on

functional food products, and how much did their reactions towards functional foods

bearing health claims change six years after the implementation of the Regulation?

Specifically :

1) How do consumers' characteristics (diet-health awareness, current use of

health claims and symbols, perception of validity of health claims and

symbols, familiarity with specific functional food product concepts,

socio-demographic background, special diet status and diet-related medical

history) relate to the level of motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols?

2) Is there any relation between consumers’ motivation and ability to process

health claims and symbols?

3) Are consumers' reactions towards health claims and symbols (in terms of

perceived credibility and purchase intention) related to the level of

motivation and ability to process these claims and symbols?

4) Are there changes in consumers’ reactions towards health claims six years

after the implementation of the Regulation?

3

1.4 Research hypotheses

The research questions will be answered by testing the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): The level of motivation and ability to process health claims and

symbols are related to consumers' characteristics, specifically a higher motivation

and ability is expected among/with:

H1a: Participants with a higher awareness of the link between diet and health

H1b: Participants with a higher use of health claims and symbols

H1c: Participants who perceive that all health claims and symbols are regulated by

the European laws and substantiated by scientific evidence

H1d: Participants who are more familiar with the product concepts

H1e: Participants with diet-related medical history

H1f: Women versus men

H1g: Increasing age

H1h: Higher educational level

H1i: Participants on a diet or following health regimes

H1j: Participants responsible for the main food purchasing

Hypothesis 2 (H2): There is a positive relation between consumers’ motivation and

ability to process health claims and symbols.

Hypothesis 3 (H3): The level of motivation and ability to process health claims and

symbols are related to consumers' reactions towards the health claims and symbols,

specifically a higher motivation and ability is expected among:

H3a: Participants with a higher perceived credibility of the product concepts

H3b: Participants with a higher purchase intention of the product concepts

Hypothesis 4 (H4): There are changes in consumers’ reactions towards health claims

six years after implementation of the Regulation.

H4a: There is a significant decrease in participants’ credibility of functional foods

with health claims compared to six years ago

H4b: There is a significant decrease in participants' purchase intention of

functional foods with health claims compared to six years ago

4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 The role of EU legislation on health claims and symbols in the promotion of

healthy eating

Consumers have become increasingly aware of the relation between diet and health

(American Dietetic Association, 2006). More attention has been paid to the

information sources which are related to health during food purchase (Gerrior, 2010).

Recent market data showed that there was an increasing demand for functional

foods in many countries, even in a challenged economy (American Dietetic

Association, 2010). The growing market is explained by the increasing cost of health

care, the aging population, and the desire of consumers for an improved quality of

their later years (Siro et al., 2008).

However, consumers cannot simply observe or feel the nutritional value or the

health benefits of a food product, even after consumption (Caswell & Mojduszka,

1996). In general, consumers have limited motivation and ability to obtain and

understand complicated information about nutrition and health. As a result, they

only read the information superficially at the point of purchase (Gerrior, 2010). In

order to protect consumers from being misled by this superficial information on food

products, Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 has come into force in the European Union

since January 2007 (European Commission, 2007), to regulate all types of claims.

Basically, two types of claims can be made on food products, namely nutrition claims

and health claims. Health claims can be subdivided into functional health claims,

reduction of disease risk claims, and claims referring to children's development and

health. In this study, only functional health claims were investigated, hereafter

referred to as "health claims". Health claims are defined as any message that states a

relation between a food category, a food or one of its constituents, and health, e.g.

"Calcium is needed to maintain healthy teeth". Whether generic or product-specific,

the health benefits claimed must be substantiated by scientific evidence that shows

the effect of the food or food constituents on health under normal or typical

conditions of use (Gilsenan, 2011). In contrast, health symbols are neither regulated

nor standardized under this Regulation. Health symbols refer to any pictorial, graphic

or symbolic representation (for example, Figure 1).

Figure 1. An example of possible health symbols on the labels of food products

5

awarded to food products which meet certain nutrition requirements and constitute

the healthiest option within a product category (European Commission, 2007). In the

following sections, the term "health-related information" would be used to describe

health claims and symbols.

2.2 Processing of health claims and symbols

The availability of correct health claims and symbols from a scientific perspective

may help consumers to make more informed and healthier food choices. However,

there is no guarantee that consumers actually use and/or really benefit from the

information disclosures (Grunert & Wills, 2007). The actual effects highly depend on

the interaction with consumers, their characteristics and the resulting behaviour

(Hieke & Taylor, 2012; Moorman, 1990). This study focused on the primary

determinants of the processing level of health claims and symbols. Studies have

shown that consumers' level of processing depends on the opportunity, their

motivation and ability during or right after the information exposure (Maclnnis et al.,

1991). Assuming that the opportunity is present, in which there is sufficient

scientifically sound health claims and symbols available at an appropriate moment,

then the only uncertainties are the motivation and ability of consumers to process

these health-related information on food products. Both the motivation and ability

are important determinants of the actual and accurate use of health claims and

symbols, and they may further influence food choice and healthy eating behaviour

(Yoon & George, 2012).

2.2.1 Motivation to process

Motivation has been defined as goal-directed arousal, which can be explained in this

case as the desire or readiness of consumers to process health-related information

(Moorman, 1990). Consumers with a higher level of motivation tend to be more

willing to allocate processing resources (Maclnnis et al., 1991), thus it increases the

accessibility and the probability that the information is processed. As illustrated in

the following theoretical model (Figure 2), motivation influences attention which is

crucial to the use of the information. If consumers’ motivation is low, it is less likely

that they would pay attention to the information and then use the information

(EUFIC, 2012).

6

Figure 2. A theoretical model for the effects of the information shown on food labels

on customers’ information processing and use (EUFIC, 2012)

Studies have shown that a lack of motivation, (and also attention), has been an

important barrier, impeding the effects brought by health-related information on

consumers' food choices (EUFIC, 2012). Therefore, it is important to determine how

motivated consumers actually are, in order to estimate the attention paid to the

information and its use.

2.2.2 Ability to process

Another important determinant of consumers' use of health-related information is

their ability to process the information (Moorman, 1990). Information processing

ability refers to the prior knowledge of consumers that allows them to interpret the

information (Maclnnis et al., 1991), which could be sub-divided into subjective

knowledge and objective knowledge. Subjective knowledge is the perception of

people on what or how much they know, which is also known as self-assessed or

perceived knowledge measured by self-reporting (Park et al., 1994). Objective

knowledge is the actual knowledge in an individual's memory, which could be

measured by various factual knowledge tests (Kanwar et al., 1990). Studies have

concluded that both types of consumers' knowledge, subjective and objective, are

associated with the accuracy of health-related information use (Moorman, 1990;

Grunert & Wills, 2007; Yoon & George, 2012). Moreover, both knowledge types

relate to the level of consumers' understanding of health claims and symbols

(Grunert et al., 2010), which can further influence how consumers use the

information (Figure 2) (Drichoutis et al., 2005), evaluate food products, and make

food choices (Yoon & George, 2012).

7

2.2.2.1 Subjective understanding

Subjective understanding refers to the meaning that people attach to the perceived

information, as well as how much the individuals believe that they have understood

what have been communicated (Kardes et al., 2004). It significantly influences

consumers’ use of health claims and symbols (Drichoutis et al., 2005). However,

most studies are criticized for using samples of volunteer participants (Cowburn &

Stockley, 2005), who have different levels of subjective understanding compared to

the general population. It can hardly be used as the only evidence base to accurately

estimate consumers’ habitual use of health claims and symbols (Cowburn & Stockley,

2005). Therefore, Grunert and Wills (2007) suggested that it is important to also

determine what they have actually understood, through the probing of objective

understanding (see 2.2.2.2 Objective understanding), in order to study the health or

nutrition effects brought by the use of these health claims and symbols.

2.2.2.2 Objective understanding

Studies showed that a higher level of objective knowledge led to a better

understanding of health-related information, which made it the strongest indicator

of the ability of consumers to correctly understand health claims and symbols

(Grunert et al., 2010). Moorman (1993) suggested that objective understanding

could be measured by probing the understanding of terminology used in health

claims. Many studies reported that although consumers could understand many of

the terms or types of nutrients mentioned on food labels, they did not truly

understand the roles of the food products or functional ingredients played in their

diets and health (Cowburn & Stockley, 2005).

2.2.3 Relation between motivation and ability

The ability to process health-related information was reported to be higher in the

consumers with higher level of motivation (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986). Moorman

(1990) also reported that when there was more motivation, it led to a higher level of

understanding for health-related information. It was indicated that when consumers

had sufficient motivation to process health claims and symbols, the ability in terms

of knowledge and understanding would have significant effects on consumer food

decision-making (Yoon, & George, 2012). When understanding is the prerequisite for

meaningful use of health-related information (Moorman, 1990; Grunert & Wills,

2007; Yoon & George, 2012), many studies have also shown that the level of usage is

much lower than the level expected, given any particular level of understanding

(Grunert et al., 2010), thus it has been repeatedly emphasized that it is important to

consider consumers' motivation beside understanding.

8

2.3 Consumers' reactions towards health claims and symbols

This study would also serve as a follow-up research for the study conducted in 2006

among 341 Belgian consumers on their appeal of nutrition and health claims in three

different product concepts with three different types of claims (Verbeke et al., 2009).

The findings showed that consumers' reactions to health claims highly depended on

personal beliefs about the health benefits claimed, which were largely shaped by the

information and communication that consumers received from sources regarded as

trustworthy (Bech-Larsen & Grunert, 2003; Verbeke et al., 2009).

2.3.1 Perceived credibility and purchase intention

Perceived credibility can be defined as the judgement of consumers about the

quality and veracity of the information processed (Schiffman et al., 2008), such as

the health claims and symbols on food product labels. Purchase intention refers to

the reported probability of buying a product, which is associated with the intention

that the consumers would actually purchase the product (Whitlar et al., 1993). Both

types of consumers' reactions were found to be associated with the specific

claim–carrier combinations, and were measured by self-reporting and using different

food products with different health claims and symbols as stimuli (van Kleef et al.,

2005; Verbeke et al., 2009).

2.4 Consumers' characteristics influencing their processing of and reactions to

health claims and symbols

Consumers generally were found to have high awareness of the link between diet

and health (Armstrong et al,. 2005). Previous studies have shown that individuals

with higher awareness tended to be more motivated to use health-related

information such as health claims and symbols (Vyth et al., 2010). On the other hand,

consumers' motivation was also influenced by the perceived credibility and types of

health-related information (Krystallis et al., 2008). Consumers claimed to be more

motivated to process health-related information when they were unfamiliar with the

products, and that influenced significantly their purchase intention (Cowburn &

Stockley, 2005). However, consumers who were more motivated and with higher

level of subjective knowledge tended to evaluate the functional food items more

unfavourably, and were found to have a lower purchase intention (Yoon & George,

2012), but inconsistent results were reported in other studies.

A stronger belief that food has an impact on health, a higher level of product

familiarity and subjective knowledge were positively related to perceived credibility

and purchase intention, whereas attitudinal factors such as perceived control over

9

own health or perceptions of functional foods (e.g. as a marketing scam) were

negatively associated with perceived credibility and purchase intention (Urala &

Lähteenmäki, 2004 ; Urala & Lähteenmäki, 2007; Verbeke et al., 2009). Thus, it was

indicated that consumers' attitudes and familiarity with the product concept are

crucial determinants of the structure of functional food market (Verbeke, 2010).

Besides, Consumers’ processing of information is often associated with their trust in

and knowledge about the matters (Bech-Larsen & Grunert, 2003; Bech-Larsen &

Scholderer, 2007; Urala & Lähteenmäki, 2007). Consumers were expected to have

less trust in health claims if they were not aware of the Regulation (all claims have to

be scientifically substantiated) and might perceive that claims are just marketing

gimmicks (Verbeke et al., 2009). In contrast, consumers were expected to have more

trust in health symbols if they were not aware that they were not regulated.

2.4.1 Socio-demographic background

Females, consumers who follow health regimes or have been confronted with

diet-related diseases, were found to be more motivated to process health-related

information (Dean et al., 2012; Grunert et al., 2010; Urala, 2005; Yoon & George,

2012), as they are more interested in healthy eating and health in general (Bogue &

Ryan, 2000; Childs & Poryzees, 1997). Older consumers tend to be more motivated

than younger groups because of the increased health concerns (Grunert & Wills,

2007; Yoon & George, 2012), but have a lower ability to process health-related

information, especially in terms of objective understanding (Yoon & George, 2012).

Meanwhile, consumers with a higher educational level tend to be more capable to

process the information because of better understanding (Grunert et al., 2010).

Perceived credibility was reported to be positively associated with male and younger

age groups (Verbeke et al., 2009), while purchase intention was positively associated

with older age groups (Poulsen, 1999).

Generally, socio-demographic characteristics play important roles in the processing

of health-related information such as the motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols (Bogue & Ryan, 2000; Grunert et al., 2010). However, they play a

relatively minor role in consumers' reactions, such as perceived credibility and

purchase intention, to functional food product with health claims, which poses

difficulties to food industries while they are targeting particular market segments

(Verbeke, 2005; Verbeke et al., 2009).

10

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study design

3.1.1 Pre-testing and study protocol

This study was conducted with the use of survey (Appendix A) which was developed

in English and translated into Dutch. A preliminary version of the survey was

pretested in a small sample of 21 researchers and university students (11 of the 21

are with formal nutrition education background) for clarity of content, language/

wording, overall understanding and length of the survey. The survey was then

refined and finalized according to the feedback, and included in the study protocol.

The Belgian Ethics Committee of the Ghent University Hospital granted ethics

approval (Ethics Approval No. B670201316620) after reviewing the study protocol.

3.1.2 Sampling and data collection

Quantitative descriptive data were collected through a cross-sectional structured

web-based consumer survey in the Dutch speaking part of Belgium (Flanders) in

February 2013. Total sample size was 565 participants. Participants were randomly

selected from the consumer panel provided by Thesistools. Such panels consist of

individuals who were recruited through off-line recruitment methods (e.g. random

walk or street contact procedures) and who agreed to take part in future surveys. All

contact and questionnaire administration procedures were electronic. Qualtrics was

used as the software carrying out the web-based survey.

All participants were asked to provide written consent before the study (Appendix A).

In order to guarantee the anonymity and confidentiality of the data, a code or id

number will be used as identity. As such, all data were coded and processed

anonymously.

3.2 Measures

The survey consisted of four parts: (1) motivation to process, (2) ability to process

health claims and symbols, (3) consumers' reactions in terms of perceived credibility

and purchase intention of product concepts, (4) consumer characteristics influencing

processing of health claims and symbols. As previous studies showed that different

functional foods could elicit different consumer reactions (Ares & Gambaro, 2007;

Urala & Lähteenmäki, 2004), thus, functional foods should be studied as separate

products within the various food categories instead of one homogeneous group (Siro

et al., 2008). Three types of food products were considered in this study (Table 1), i.e.

11

cereals enriched with dietary fibre as an example of product commonly considered

as healthy with a natural and familiar type of enrichment, fruit juice enriched with

calcium as a healthy product with an unnatural type of enrichment, and spread

enriched with omega-3 fatty acids as a potentially less healthy product with a

commonly considered as healthy type of enrichment (Verbeke et al., 2009). As this

study served as a follow-up of Verbeke et al. (2009), the same product concepts

were used to enable comparison and investigation of changes in consumers'

reactions towards the functional foods with health claims in the past six years.

Table 1. Product concepts (i.e. carrier–enrichment–claim or symbol) used as

examples (Verbeke et al., 2009)

Product concept Health claim Health symbols

Calcium-enriched fruit juice Fruit juice enriched with

calcium can strengthen bones

Omega-3 enriched spread

Spread enriched with omega-3

fatty acids can improve heart

health

Fibre-enriched cereals

Breakfast cereals enriched

with dietary fibre can improve

the intestinal transit function

The order bias was avoided by rotating the blocks of product concepts across

participants. This measure was used in numbers of health claim studies for assessing

product appeal, claim evaluation and behavioural intention (Hooker & Teratanavat,

2008; Patch, Williams, & Tapsell, 2005; van Kleef et al., 2005; van Trijp & van der

Lans, 2007; Verbeke, Scholderer, & Lähteenmäki, 2009; Williams et al., 2008).

12

3.2.1 Dependent variables

3.2.1.1 Motivation to process health claims and symbols

Motivation to process health claims and symbols was assessed in general (Q5) and

specifically for three product concepts (Q8, Q9, Q10), i.e. calcium-enriched fruit juice,

fibre-enriched breakfast cereals and omega-3-enriched spread (Table 1). The

measure used three items on a five-point Likert scale (e.g. "I am interested in looking

for health claims and symbols on food in general") based on Moorman (1990).

3.2.1.2 Ability to process health claims and symbols

Participants' ability to process health claims and symbols was evaluated based on

their subjective knowledge (Q11), subjective understanding of health claims (Q15)

and symbols (Q13), and objective understanding of health claims (Q18-Q22) and

symbols (Q14). Subjective or perceived knowledge of participants was measured on

a five-point Likert scale by means of three items adapted from Moorman et al. (2004)

(e.g. "Compared to most people, I am quite knowledgeable about health claims and

symbols") (Q11). Studies showed that subjective knowledge is an important

determinant influencing consumer behaviour such as information processing (Brucks,

1985; Rao & Sieben, 1992), and also associated with the accuracy of using

health-related information such as health claims and symbols (Moorman, 1993).

Subjective understanding of health claims and symbols was measured on a five-point

interval scale from “Do not understand at all” (=1) to “Understand extremely well”

(=5) (Q13, Q15). Objective understanding was measured based on factual knowledge

tests (Q14 and Q18-Q22) (Kanwar et al., 1990) in which participants were asked to

mark the correct meaning of a health claim (as approved by EFSA) or symbol among

other related meanings. The actual knowledge of consumers has been found to

influence the accuracy of using health-related information (Moorman, 1993).

3.2.1.3 Consumers' reactions in terms of perceived credibility and purchase

intention of product concepts

Participants were asked to evaluate the credibility of the three products with health

claims or symbols on a five-point interval scale ranging from “Not credible at all” (=1)

to “Extremely credible” (=5) (Q16). The second outcome variable was consumers’

intention to buy the product concepts (Q17), which was similarly assessed for the

three claim types on a five-point interval scale ranging from “Not likely at all” (=1) to

“Extremely likely” (=5). The perceived credibility and purchase intention of product

concepts were dependent variables for testing Hypothesis 4, and they were serving

as independent variables for testing of Hypothesis 3 (See P.3).

13

3.2.2 Independent variables

3.2.2.1 Consumers' characteristics influencing processing of and reactions

towards health claims and symbols

The studied influencing factors included diet-health awareness, current use of health

claims and symbols in general, perception of validity of health claims and symbols,

familiarity with the product concepts, socio-demographic background, special diet

status, and diet-related medical history.

Participants’ diet-health awareness was measured on a five-point Likert scale by

means of six items each (e.g. "Food plays an important role for keeping me in good

health") (Q3). It was related to the perceived control over their personal health with

diets, and they were asked to compare if they eat healthier than six years ago

(Verbeke et al., 2009).

To assess participants’ current usage of health-related information in general, and

health claims and symbols specifically, participants were asked to rate on a five-point

interval scale to show how often they used the information when food shopping,

ranging from "Never" (=1) to "Very often" (=5) (Q4).

Perceptions of the scientific validity of health claims and symbols consumers were

measured on a five-point Likert scale by means of three items each (e.g. Health

claims are just marketing gimmicks, usually food companies create the claims to

attract consumers) (Q6, Q7). As such, participants’ knowledge about the current EU

legislation on claims and symbols was evaluated as well.

Participants’ familiarity with the different product concepts was assessed using a

five-point frequency scale, ranging from ‘‘I have never seen it’’ (=1) to ‘‘I consume it

frequently’’ (=5) (Q12). Product familiarity was indicated as a key factor influencing

the type and extent of information-processing activities (Moorman 1990).

At last, socio-demographic information of the consumers were collected, such as

gender (Q30), age (based on Q31), educational level (Q32), and role in household

(Q37). In addition, participants were asked if they were following any health regime

(Q38), had any diet-related medical history (Q39). Since claims were perceived more

positively when it is personally relevant (Dean et al., 2012), thus, this study also

investigated participants’ special diet status and diet-related medical history, which

was not investigated in previous studies.

See Appendix A: Survey for the specific measures and scales.

14

3.3 Data analysis

3.3.1 Data cleaning and recoding

The statistical analyses were carried out with IBM® SPSS® Statistics 21.0 (SPSS Inc.,

2012). The data was available in an electronic form directly after the online survey. It

was firstly subjected to defining the variables, which included naming, labelling,

coding the values (e.g. 1 = Totally disagree), choosing the correct types (e.g. numeric

or string) and measures (ordinal, nominal, or scale). Parts of the data were

transformed and computed into different variables (e.g. calculation of age (in years)

from the year of birth, sum of score for objective understanding, and reversing scales

for the items in perception of validity that measured the same outcome with

opposite scales, etc.), and some were recorded differently (e.g. education recoded

into two levels, different diet-related health problems recoded into presence of

diet-related medical history, etc.).

3.3.2 New constructs of variables and reliability test

The variables with several items measuring the same concepts were regrouped for

further analysis. In order to measure the internal consistency and reliability of these

new construct variables, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed as followed

(Table 2), items which largely lowered internal consistency were removed. New

construct variables were developed by calculating the mean values.

Table 2. The reliability tests for new constructs of variables

New construct variables Number

of items

Cronbach's

Alpha*

Awareness of the link between diet and health 3 0.60

Current usage of health claims and symbols 3 0.87

Perception of health claims and symbols as marketing gimmicks 4 0.79

General motivation for processing health claims and symbols a 3 0.91

Motivation measured through product concepts a

General subjective knowledge about health claims and symbols

9 0.96

3 0.84

Overall subjective understanding measured through product concepts 6 0.86

Subjective understanding for health claims 3 0.89

Subjective understanding for health symbols 3 0.90

*The new constructs were only considered as reliable when Cronbach's Alpha is larger than 0.60.

a Paired-samples t-tests showed that there was a significant difference between the mean responses

in motivation for processing health claims and symbols generally and the motivation measured

through product concepts (p-value < 0.001). Thus, they were considered as two variables separately.

15

3.3.3 Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample characteristics and outcomes

(see Chapter 4: Results) ̧which were either presented as frequency distributions in

numbers and percentages ("valid percent" was adopted, as it took the missing values

into account), or displayed as mean values and standard deviations (only for scale

and ordinal variables). The frequency distributions were also used for checking

possible errors or mistakes in the dataset (e.g. mistakes made during recoding).

3.3.4 Statistical analysis

3.3.4.1 Assumptions and mean comparison

Paired-samples t-tests were used to compare the means of two different variables

from the same sample (e.g. Chapter 4: Results, 4.1.4.1, paired-samples t-tests were

used to test if participants reported significantly different level of perceived

credibility to the products with health claims compared to health symbols).

In order to compare the means of variables between categories, independent-

sample t-tests and one-way ANOVA F-tests were carried out. There were

assumptions to be fulfilled before performing these tests, such as normality in

sample distribution of each category and homogeneity of variances (equal variances).

For independent-sample t-tests, the sample normality was validated with

two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, normal distribution was assumed when the

p-value was larger than 0.05. For one-way ANOVA F-tests, the subsamples were

separated by each categorical variable, and then one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov

tests were performed, normal distribution was assumed when the p-value was larger

than 0.05. Levene statistics were used to test equal variance, in which the variances

were equal when p-value was larger than 0.05. If any one or two of the assumptions

was not fulfilled, non-parametric tests were used instead; Mann-Whitney U tests for

independent-sample t-tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests for one-way ANOVA F-tests.

Independent-sample t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used when the variables

only contained two categories. As the majority of participants did not choose the

extremist responses (e.g. totally disagree or totally agree), some variables were

regrouped from five categories into two (e.g. for Hypothesis 1a, Group 1 = relatively

lower awareness of the link between diet and health, and Group 2 = relatively higher

awareness of the link between diet and health). Independent-sample t-tests or

Mann-Whitney U tests were also used to test each of the relatively higher or lower

group in every variable, which was to ensure that the relatively higher group was

significantly higher than the relatively lower group (e.g. for Hypothesis 1a, Group 2

16

has significantly higher level of diet-health awareness than Group 1). In this study,

independent-sample t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to test Hypothesis

1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f, 1h, 1i, 3a, 3b, 4a, and 4b (see P.3).

One-way ANOVA F-tests or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used when the variables

contained more than two categories, which were for testing Hypothesis 1g, and 1j

(see P.3). Scheffe post-hoc estimation (equal variance assumed) and Dunnett T3

post-hoc estimation (equal variance not assumed) were used to help comparing one

group to another, in which the size of groups was not equal.

3.3.4.2 Correlations

Pearson Correlations (2-tailed) were used to verify the relation between the level of

consumers' motivation and ability to process health claim and symbols (Hypothesis

2a and 2 b) (see P.3). The correlation-coefficient (-1 to 1) showed the relation

between the variables; -1 indicates a strong negative relation, and 1 indicates a

strong relation.

3.3.4.3 Chi-square statistics

As the participants in the follow-up study were not the same participants in the

previous studies, the difference in responses could be associated with the difference

in sample characteristics. For a more effective and accurate comparison of the

follow-up and previous study (Hypothesis 4a and 4b) (see P.3), chi-square statistics

(goodness-of-fit test) were used to determine if the frequencies of sample

characteristics (gender, age, and education level) between the two samples

(follow-up and previous study) were significantly different. When the p-value was

smaller than 0.05, the two samples were significantly different in that specific

characteristic.

17

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

4.1 Descriptive statistics


The final sample consisted of 565 participants with a mean age of 44-year-old and a

majority of female (61.9%). The most of the participants have received higher

education such as bachelor, master or PhD (67.8%), only 5.8% of them did not finish

secondary education. About half of the participants were the main shoppers for their

households (52.7%). There were 42.8% of participants following health regime, and

only 35.2% of the participants had no diet-related medical history (Table 3).

Table 3. Socio-demographic characteristics (Mean ± SD) and (n (%)) (N = 565)

Mean ± SD

Age (Years) (min = 15, max = 84 years) 43.86 ± 14.74

Frequency (%)

Gender

Male 215 (38.1%)

Female 350 (61.9%)

Educational level

Unfinished secondary education (no education, primary

education, lower secondary education)

33 (5.8%)

Secondary education (higher secondary education) 143 (25.3%)

Higher education (bachelor, master or PhD) 383 (67.8%)

(missings: other) 6 (1.1%)

Main shopper for household

Yes 298 (52.7)

As frequent as someone else 141 (25.0%)

No 126 (22.3%)

Following of health regime

Yes 242 (42.8%)

No 323 (57.2%)

Presence of diet-related health problems

Yes 366 (64.8%)

No 199 (35.2%)

Total 565 (100%)

18

4.1.2 Background attitudes

The participants were highly aware of the links between diet and health in general,

but they rarely to sometimes use health claims and symbols, and they tended to

perceive health claims and symbols as marketing gimmicks instead of information

regulated by legislation. Health claims were significantly more perceived as

marketing gimmicks than health symbols (Table 4).

Table 4. Background attitudes (Mean ± SD) (N = 565)

Background attitudes Mean ± SD P-value (1)

Awareness of the link between diet and health a 3.97 ± 0.55 -

Current usage of health claims and symbols b 2.31 ± 0.94 -

Perception of health claims as marketing gimmicks a 3.47 ± 0.75 0.001

Perception of health symbols as marketing gimmicks a 3.39 ± 0.73 a Measured on a five-point Likert scale

b Measured on a five-point interval scale: Never (=1), Rarely (=2), Sometimes (=3), Quite often (=4),

Very often (=5) (1)

Derived from paired-samples t-tests for the mean perception of health claims versus health

symbols as marketing gimmicks

4.1.3 Product familiarity

The participants had different degrees of familiarity to the three product concepts.

Participants were familiar with or had ever consumed omega-3 enriched spread,

while calcium-enriched fruit juice was the least recognized or tried, and

fibre-enriched cereals was tried but not occasionally consumed on average (Table 5).

Table 5. Product familiarity towards the product concepts (Mean ± SD) (N = 565)

Product familiarity a Mean ± SD

Consumption frequency of calcium-enriched fruit juices 2.11 ± 1.10 b

Consumption frequency of fibre-enriched cereals 2.72 ± 1.23 c

Consumption frequency of omega-3 enriched spreads 3.09 ± 1.22 d

a Measured on a five-point interval scale: I have never seen it (=1), I recognize it but I have never tried

it (=2), I have tried it but I choose not to consume it (=3), I consume it occasionally (=4), I consume it

frequently (=5)

The letters b–d

indicate significantly different means on five-point interval scales mentioned above (a)

4.1.4 Consumers' reactions towards health claims and symbols

4.1.4.1 Perceived credibility

The different product concepts bearing health claims and symbols differed in their

credibility to participants. Generally, participants found the product concepts

somewhat credible. The products with health symbols received relatively lower

credibility than the ones with health claims, except for omega-3 enriched spreads.

Cereals enriched with dietary fibre was perceived as the most credible on average,

followed by omega-3 enriched spreads, then calcium-enriched fruit juice (Table 6).

19

Table 6. Perceived credibility towards the product concepts with health claims and

symbols (Mean ± SD) (N = 565)

Perceived credibility a Mean ± SD P-value (1)

Calcium-enriched fruit juices b

Health claim 2.87 ± 0.98 <0.001

Health symbol 2.62 ± 0.92

Fibre-enriched cereals c

Health claim 3.31 ± 0.95 <0.001


Omega-3 enriched spreads d

Health claim 3.08 ± 0.95 0.77

Health symbol 3.03 ± 0.95 a

Measured on a five-point interval scale: Not at all credible (=1), Slightly credible (=2), Somewhat

credible (=3), Moderately credible (=4), Extremely credible (=5)

The letters b–d


(1) Derived from paired-samples t-tests for the mean perceived credibility of product concept bearing health claim versus health symbol

4.1.4.2 Purchase intention

Participants were slightly to somewhat likely to purchase the product concepts in

general, calcium-enriched fruit juice with health symbol received relatively lower

purchase intention than the one with health claim. Participants reported higher

purchase intention towards fibre-enriched cereals and omega-3-enriched spreads,

compared to calcium-enriched fruit juice (Table 7).

Table 7. Purchase intention towards the product concepts with health claims and

symbols (Mean ± SD) (N = 565)

Intention to purchase a Mean ± SD P-value (1)

Calcium-enriched fruit juices b

Health claim 2.23 ± 1.05 0.006


Fibre-enriched cereals c

Health claim 2.70 ± 1.16 0.063


Omega-3 enriched spreads c

Health claim 2.62 ± 1.15 0.204

Health symbol 2.59 ± 1.17 a

Measured on a five-point interval scale: Not likely at all (=1), Slightly likely (=2), Somewhat likely (=3),

Moderately likely (=4), Extremely likely (=5)

The letters b–c


(1) Derived from paired-samples t-tests for the mean purchase intention of product concept bearing health claim versus health symbol

20

4.1.5 Motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

The participants were not highly motivated to process health claims and symbols in

general as well as based on product concepts. In terms of ability, moderate

subjective knowledge was reported on average. Participants expressed high

subjective understanding of the health-related information on product concepts,

especially of health claims. Oppositely, objective understanding of health claims

were found to be significantly lower than for health symbols, though the overall

objective understanding was quite high (Table 8).

Table 8. Motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols (Mean ± SD) (N

= 565)

Mean ± SD P-value (1)

Motivation

General motivation for processing health claims and symbols a 2.66 ± 1.01 -

Motivation measured through product concepts a 2.55 ± 0.99 -

Ability

General subjective knowledge about health claims and symbols a 2.98 ± 0.84 -

Overall subjective understanding measured through product

concepts a

3.90 ± 0.78 -

Subjective understanding of health claims a 4.07 ± 0.75 <0.001

Subjective understanding of health symbols a 3.73 ± 1.09

Overall objective understanding b 5.42 ± 1.67 -

Objective understanding of health claims c 2.77 ± 0.55 <0.001

Objective understanding of health symbols d 2.65 ± 1.47

a Measured on a five-point Likert scale

b Measured based on a full-score of eight points

c Measured based on a full-score of three points

d Measured based on a full-score of five points

(1) Derived from paired-samples t-tests for the mean subjective or objective understanding of health

claims versus health symbols

21

4.2 Relations between consumers' characteristics and the level of motivation and

ability to process health claims and symbols

4.2.1 Awareness of the link between diet and health

Results have indicated that the individuals with higher diet-health awareness tended

to be more motivated to process health claims and symbols in general as well as to

the product concepts (p < 0.001). A higher level of ability in terms of subjective

knowledge and subjective understanding were also found among individuals with

higher diet-health awareness (p < 0.001). Objective understanding was not

significantly associated with awareness (p > 0.05) (Table 9).

Table 9. Relations between consumers' diet-health awareness and their motivation

and ability to process health claims and symbols

Awareness of the link

between diet and health

(Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 203)

Higher (1)

(n = 362)

p-value

Motivation

General motivation for processing health claims

and symbols a

2.38 ± 0.97 2.82 ± 1.00 <0.001 (2)

Motivation measured through product concepts a 2.39 ± 0.91 2.67 ± 1.00 <0.001 (2)

Ability

General subjective knowledge about health claims

and symbols a

2.72 ± 0.80 3.12 ± 0.83 <0.001 (2)

Overall subjective understanding measured

through product concepts a

3.71 ± 0.84 4.01 ± 0.73 <0.001 (2)

Subjective understanding of health claims a 3.90 ± 0.81 4.16 ± 0.69 <0.001 (2)

Subjective understanding of health symbols a 3.51 ± 1.15 3.87 ± 1.03 <0.001 (2)

Overall objective understanding b 5.21 ± 1.80 5.54 ± 1.59 0.071 (2)

Objective understanding of health claims c 2.51 ± 1.54 2.73 ± 1.44 0.089 (3)

Objective understanding of health symbols d 2.70 ± 0.65 2.81 ± 0.48 0.104 (2)





(1) Cut-off point was set at 3.67, ≤3.67 was categorized as lower, and >3.67 as higher

(2) Derived from Mann-Whitney U tests

(3) Derived from independent-sample t-tests

22

4.2.2 Current usage of health claims and symbols

Individuals with higher current usage of health claims and symbols were likely to be

more motivated to process this health-related information in general and in specific

product concepts (p < 0.001). The higher usage group also had higher levels of

subjective knowledge and subjective understanding of health claims and symbols (p

< 0.05). Similar to diet-health awareness, the usage was not associated to objective

understanding of health claims and symbols (p > 0.05).

Table 10. Relations between consumers' current usage of and their motivation and


Current usage of health

claims and symbols

(Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 280)

Higher (1)

(n = 285)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.00 ± 0.76 3.31 ± 0.78 <0.001 (2)


Ability


and symbols a

2.70 ± 0.87 3.25 ± 0.71 <0.001 (2)



3.80 ± 0.85 4.01 ± 0.70 0.003 (2)

Subjective understanding of health claims a 3.99 ± 0.81 4.15 ± 0.67 0.034 (2)

Subjective understanding of health symbols a 3.61 ± 1.17 3.87 ± 0.98 0.004 (3)








(1) Cut-off point was set at 2, ≤2 was categorized as lower, and >2 as higher



23

4.2.3 Perception of validity

The motivation in general and towards product concepts were lower in those who

perceived health claims and symbols as marketing gimmicks instead of information

regulated by the legislation (p < 0.05). However, this perception of validity was not

related to subjective knowledge, subjective understanding and objective knowledge

(all aspects of ability) (p > 0.05).

Table 11. Relations between consumers' perception of validity of and their

motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

Perception of health claims and

symbols as marketing gimmicks

(Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 268)

Higher (1)

(n = 297)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.75 ± 1.04 2.58 ± 0.98 0.040 (3)


Ability


and symbols a

2.92 ± 0.85 3.03 ± 0.83 0.099 (3)



3.90 ± 0.77 3.90 ± 0.80 0.995 (3)










(1) Cut-off point was set at 3.25, ≤3.25 was categorized as lower, and >3.25 as higher



24

4.2.4 Familiarity with specific functional food product concepts

Familiarity varied with different product concepts, so findings for the three product

concepts were analyzed and reported separately. The higher familiarity was

associated with a higher motivation to process health claims and symbols for all

product concepts (p < 0.001) (Table 12, 13, and 14).

4.2.4.1 Familiarity with calcium-enriched fruit juice

The higher familiarity with calcium-enriched fruit juice was significantly associated

with the level of motivation (p < 0.001), but not with any aspect of ability (all p > 0.1).

Objective understanding of health claim (related to bone health) on this product

concept was quite low (Table 12).

Table 12. Relations between consumers' familiarity with calcium-enriched fruit juice

and their motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

Familiarity with calcium-enriched

fruit juice (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 433)

Higher (1)

(n = 132)

p-value

Motivation

Motivation for processing health claims

and symbols on fruit juice a

2.38 ± 1.03 3.10 ± 1.07 <0.001 (2)

Ability

Subjective understanding of health claim

on fruit juice a

4.18 ± 0.74 4.19 ± 0.71 0.924 (3)

Subjective understanding of health

symbol on fruit juice a

3.74 ± 1.21 3.81 ± 1.14 0.573 (3)

Objective understanding of health claim

on fruit juice b

0.59 ± 0.49 0.51 ± 0.50 0.103 (3)

Objective understanding of health

symbol on fruit juice b

0.90 ± 0.31 0.89 ± 0.32 0.752 (3)


b Measured based on a full-score of one point




25

4.2.4.2 Familiarity with fibre-enriched breakfast cereals

Participants who were more familiar with fibre-enriched breakfast cereals were also

more motivated and subjectively capable to understand the health claim and

symbols on breakfast cereals (p ≤ 0.001). Familiarity with this product concept was

not related to objective understanding of the health claim (p > 0.05), but positively

related to health symbol (p < 0.05). Objective understanding of health claim (related

to bowel function) on this product concept was quite low (Table 13).

Table 13. Relations between consumers' familiarity with fibre-enriched breakfast

cereals and their motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols.

Familiarity with fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 315)

Higher (1)

(n = 250)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on breakfast cereal a

2.17 ± 0.98 2.88 ± 1.09 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on breakfast cereal a

4.01 ± 0.85 4.27 ± 0.75 <0.001 (2)

Subjective understanding of health symbol

on breakfast cereal a

3.56 ± 1.27 3.90 ± 1.16 0.001 (2)

Objective understanding of health claim on

breakfast cereal b

0.52 ± 0.50 0.55 ± 0.50 0.471 (3)

Objective understanding of health symbol

on breakfast cereal b

0.89 ± 0.32 0.94 ± 0.24 0.021 (3)






26

4.2.4.3 Familiarity with omega-3-enriched spread

The familiarity with omega-3-enriched spread was positively associated with

motivation (p < 0.001) and subjective understanding of the health claim on the

product (p < 0.05). No significant relation was found linked to subjective

understanding of the health symbol and objective understanding of the health claim

and symbol on this product concept (p > 0.1). Objective understanding of health

claim (related to heart function) on this product concept was quite low (Table 14).

Table 14. Relations between consumers' familiarity with omega-3-enriched spread

and their motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

Familiarity with omega-3-enriched

spread (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 250)

Higher (1)

(n = 315)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on spread a

2.19 ± 1.01 2.96 ± 1.08 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on spread a

3.79 ± 1.00 3.99 ± 0.82 0.012 (3)


symbol on spread a

3.67 ± 1.20 3.81 ± 1.09 0.156 (3)


on spread b

0.56 ± 0.50 0.50 ± 0.50 0.698 (3)


symbol on spread b

0.97 ± 0.18 0.96 ± 0.19 0.161 (3)






27

4.2.5 Diet-related medical history

Presence of diet-related medical history higher the motivation in general as well as

towards the product concepts (p < 0.05), and it was also significantly associated with

subjective understanding towards health symbols (p < 0.001). For other aspects of

ability, participants with or without diet-related health problems did not respond

significantly different (all p > 0.1) (Table 15).

Table 15. Relations between the presence of diet-related medical history and their

motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

Presence of diet-related

medical history (1)

(Mean ± SD)

No

(n = 199)

Yes

(n = 366)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.53 ± 1.04 2.73 ± 0.99 0.027 (3)

Motivation measured through product concepts a 2.44 ± 1.01 2.61 ± 0.97 0.043 (3)

Ability


and symbols a

2.96 ± 0.89 2.99 ± 0.81 0.702 (3)



4.04 ± 0.73 3.83 ± 0.80 0.002 (2)










(1) Included overweight or obesity, cardiovascular or heart disease, hypertension, irritable bowel

syndrome (IBS) or other digestive problems, diabetes, any types of cancers, high blood cholesterol

levels, and osteoporosis or other bone problems



28

4.2.6 Gender

Except for the motivation towards product concepts (p > 0.05), and subjective

understanding knowledge (p > 0.1), females had higher general motivation and

ability (subjective and objective understanding) towards health claims and symbols

than males (all p < 0.01) (Table 16).

Table 16. Relations between consumers' gender and their motivation and ability to

process health claims and symbols

Gender

(Mean ± SD)

Male

(n = 215)

Female

(n = 350)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.51 ± 1.01 2.75 ± 1.01 0.007 (3)


Ability


and symbols a

2.94 ± 0.88 3.00 ± 0.81 0.432 (3)



3.63 ± 0.86 4.07 ± 0.69 <0.001 (2)

Subjective understanding of health claims a 3.90 ± 0.81 4.17 ± 0.69 <0.001 (2)


Overall objective understanding b 5.06 ± 1.72 5.64 ± 1.60 <0.001 (2)









4.2.7 Age

Older participants were more motivated to process health claims and symbols in

general or towards product concepts (p ≤ 0.001). There was no significant difference

in subjective knowledge and subjective understanding for health claims (p > 0.1).

Younger participants had higher levels of subjective understanding of health symbols,

and objective understanding of health claims and symbols (all p < 0.01) (Table 17).

29

Table 17. Relations between consumers' age and their motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

Age in years old (Mean ± SD)

<25

(n = 94)

26 - 35

(n = 93)

35 - 45

(n = 99)

46 - 55

(n = 140)

>55

(n = 139)

p-value

Motivation

General motivation for processing health claims and symbols a 2.56 ± 1.08a,b 2.32 ± 0.98b 2.63 ± 0.98a,b 2.80 ± 1.00a,c 2.84 ± 0.97a,c 0.001 (3)

Motivation measured through product concepts a 2.30 ± 1.02a 2.25 ± 0.93a 2.49 ± 0.94a,b 2.72 ± 0.95b,c 2.79 ± 0.97b,c <0.001 (3)

Ability

General subjective knowledge about health claims and symbols a 2.83 ± 0.96 2.87 ± 0.82 3.06 ± 0.86 3.08 ± 0.78 2.99 ± 0.80 0.120 (3)

Overall subjective understanding measured through product concepts a 4.11 ± 0.73e 4.05 ± 0.74e 3.89 ± 0.80e,f 3.92 ± 0.80e,f 3.66 ± 0.77f <0.001 (3)

Subjective understanding of health claims a 4.15 ± 0.84 4.10 ± 0.70 4.09 ± 0.75 4.11 ± 0.72 3.94 ± 0.72 0.105 (2)

Subjective understanding of health symbols a 4.07 ± 0.80e 4.00 ± 1.03e 3.69 ± 1.11e,f 3.72 ± 1.14e,f 3.38 ± 1.12f <0.001 (2)

Overall objective understanding b 5.82 ± 1.49e 5.98 ± 1.47e 5.80 ± 1.74e 5.13 ± 1.57f 4.81 ± 1.69f <0.001 (3)

Objective understanding of health claims c 2.94 ± 1.41e,f,g 3.08 ± 1.32e,f 2.99 ± 1.55e,f 2.40 ± 1.42e,g 2.19 ± 1.45h <0.001 (3)

Objective understanding of health symbols d 2.88 ± 0.36e 2.90 ± 0.42e 2.81 ± 0.49e,f 2.73 ± 0.56e,f 2.61 ± 0.71e <0.001 (2)

a Measured on a 5-point Likert scale




(2) Derived from Kruskal-Wallis tests

(3) Derived from one-way ANOVA F-tests

The letters e-h

indicate significantly different means on five-point Likert scale

30

4.2.8 Education level

Education level was not associated with the level of motivation in general and

towards product concepts, nor with subjective understanding of health claims and

symbols and objective understanding for health symbols (all p > 0.05). On the other

hand, participants with higher education level tended to report higher subjective

knowledge, and they had significantly higher level of objective understanding for

health claims (p < 0.01) than the relatively lower educated group (Table 18).

Table 18. Relations between consumers' education level and their motivation and


Education level

(Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 176)

Higher (1)

(n = 383)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.73 ± 1.00 2.61 ± 1.01 0.188 (3)


Ability


and symbols a

2.81 ± 0.89 3.05 ± 0.81 0.003 (2)



3.89 ± 0.77 3.91 ± 0.80 0.772 (3)



Overall objective understanding b 5.03 ± 1.67 5.61 ± 1.64 <0.001 (2)

Objective understanding of health claims c 2.26 ± 1.47 2.84 ± 1.45 <0.001 (2)






(1) Cut-off point was set at secondary education, ≤ secondary education was categorized as lower, and

> secondary education as higher



31

4.2.9 Special diet status

Participants who were following health regime tended to be more motivated to

process health-related information in general and towards product concepts, and

they had a higher level of subjective understanding for health claims (all p < 0.05).

The special diet status was not associated with subjective knowledge, subjective

understanding of health symbols, and objective understanding of health claims and

symbols (p > 0.05) (Table 19).

Table 19. Relations between consumers' special diet status and their motivation and


Following health regime

(Mean ± SD)

No

(n = 323)

Yes

(n = 242)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols a

2.54 ± 1.01 2.83 ± 1.00 0.001 (2)


Ability


and symbols a

2.95 ± 0.84 3.02 ± 0.84 0.315 (3)



3.84 ± 0.81 3.99 ± 0.74 0.027 (3)












32

4.2.10 Role in the households

Main shopper for food and the ones who shop as frequent as someone else in their

households tended to be more motivated, and had higher level of subjective

knowledge and subjective understanding of health claims and symbols (p < 0.05).

The role of households was not associated with the motivation towards product

concepts, nor with objective understanding (p > 0.1) (Table 20).

Table 20. Relations between consumers' role in the households and their motivation

and ability to process health claims and symbols

Role in the households (Mean ± SD)

Main shopper

for food

(n = 298)

Someone

else

(n = 176)

As frequent as

someone else

(n = 383)

p-value

Motivation

General motivation for processing

health claims and symbols a

2.80 ± 1.03e 2.49 ± 0.95f 2.54 ± 0.98f 0.004 (3)

Motivation measured through

product concepts a

2.60 ± 0.99 2.40 ± 0.95 2.57 ± 0.99 0.181 (3)

Ability

General subjective knowledge

about health claims and symbols a

3.09 ± 0.81e 2.81 ± 0.93f 2.89 ± 0.79e,f 0.003 (3)

Overall subjective understanding

measured through product concepts a

3.98 ± 0.75 3.79 ± 0.84 3.85 ± 0.79 0.047 (3)

Subjective understanding of

health claims a

4.10 ± 0.72 3.91 ± 0.84 4.14 ± 0.70 0.044 (2)

Subjective understanding of

health symbols a

3.85 ± 1.03e 3.67 ± 1.13f 3.55 ± 1.14e 0.018 (3)

Overall objective understanding b 5.43 ± 1.65e 5.39 ± 1.63e,f 5.44 ± 1.74f 0.967 (3)

Objective understanding of

health claims c

2.64 ± 1.49 2.64 ± 1.43 2.70 ± 1.49 0.927 (3)

Objective understanding of

health symbols d

2.79 ± 0.46 2.75 ± 0.61 2.74 ± 0.66 0.647(3)





(2) Derived from Kruskal-Wallis tests

(3) Derived from one-way ANOVA F-tests

The letters e-f

indicate significantly different means on five-point Likert scale

33

4.3 Relations between consumers' motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols

General motivation and motivation based on product concepts were positively and

significantly correlated to general subjective knowledge (Person correlation, r > 0.3,

p < 0.001) and subjective understanding (Person correlation, r > 0.1, p < 0.01). There

was no significant correlation established between motivation to process and

objective understanding of health claims and symbols, no matter product-specific or

not (Person correlation, -0.1 < r < 0.1 , p ≥ 0.05) (Table 21).

Table 21. Relations between consumers' motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols

Motivation

General motivation for

processing health claims

and symbols a

Motivation measured

through product

concepts a

Ability

Pearson

Correlation

p-value (1) Pearson

Correlation

p-value (1)

General subjective knowledge about

health claims and symbols a

0.387 <0.001 0.307 <0.001

Overall subjective understanding

measured through product concepts a

0.177 <0.001 0.111 0.008

Overall objective understanding b -0.005 0.897 -0.082 0.050



(1) Derived from bivariate correlation

34

4.4 Relations between consumers' reactions and the level of motivation and


Perceived credibility and purchase intention varied with different product concepts,

so they were analyzed and reported separately. The higher perceived credibility and

purchase intention were associated with higher motivation to process health claims

and symbols for all product concepts (p < 0.001) (Table 22 to 27).

4.4.1 Perceived credibility of the product concepts

4.4.1.1 Perceived credibility of calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing health claim

and symbol

The perceived credibility of calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing health claim or

symbol was positively associated with the motivation and subjective understanding

(p < 0.001), but not with objective understanding for both health claim and symbol

(p > 0.05) (Table 22 and 23).

Table 22. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of calcium-enriched

fruit juice bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols.

Perceived credibility of

calcium-enriched fruit juice

bearing health claim (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 417)

Higher (1)

(n = 148)

p-value

Motivation



2.38 ± 1.04 3.01 ± 1.06 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on fruit juice a

4.08 ± 0.74 4.49 ± 0.60 <0.001 (2)


on fruit juice b

0.58 ± 0.50 0.55 ± 0.50 0.651 (3)






35

Table 23. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of calcium-enriched

fruit juice bearing health symbol and their motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols


calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing

health symbol (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 467)

Higher (1)

(n = 98)

p-value

Motivation



2.40 ± 1.03 3.22 ± 1.05 <0.001 (2)

Ability



3.67 ± 1.22 4.18 ± 0.93 <0.001 (2)



0.90 ± 0.30 0.86 ± 0.35 0.247 (3)






36

4.4.1.2 Perceived credibility of fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing health

claim and symbol

The higher perceived credibility of fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing health

claim or symbol was also found positively associated with motivation and subjective

understanding (all p < 0.05) (Table 24 and 25). Objective understanding was only

positively associated with the one with health symbol (p < 0.001) (Table 25), but not

health claim (p > 0.1) (Table 24).

Table 24. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process



fibre-enriched breakfast cereals


Lower (1)

(n = 309)

Higher (1)

(n = 256)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on breakfast cereals s

2.19 ± 0.98 2.83 ± 1.10 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on breakfast cereals a

3.93 ± 0.84 4.36 ± 0.71 <0.001 (2)


on breakfast cereals b

0.54 ± 0.50 0.52 ± 0.50 0.621 (3)






37

Table 25. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health symbols and their motivation and ability to process


Perceived credibility of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health

symbol (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 361)

Higher (1)

(n = 204)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on breakfast cereals a

2.23 ± 1.00 2.92 ± 1.09 <0.001 (2)

Ability


symbol on breakfast cereals a

3.50 ± 1.26 4.08 ± 1.09 <0.001 (2)


symbol on breakfast cereals b

0.89 ± 0.32 0.95 ± 0.22 0.004 (3)






38

4.4.1.3 Perceived credibility of omega-3-enriched spread bearing health claim

and symbol

Similar to the concept of calcium-enriched fruit juice, the higher perceived credibility

of omega-3-enriched spread bearing health claim or symbol was positively

associated with motivation and subjective understanding for both health claim and

symbol (all p < 0.001), but there was no significant association with objective

understanding for both cases (p > 0.05) (Table 26 and 27).

Table 26. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of omega-3-enriched

spread bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols


omega-3-enriched spread bearing

health claim (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 369)

Higher (1)

(n = 196)

p-value

Motivation



2.34 ± 1.02 3.14 ± 1.10 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on spread a

3.72 ± 0.97 4.25 ± 0.68 <0.001 (2)


on spread b

0.52 ± 0.50 0.55 ± 0.50 0.487 (3)






39

Table 27. Relations between consumers' perceived credibility of omega-3-enriched

spread bearing health symbol and their motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols




Lower (1)

(n = 380)

Higher (1)

(n = 185)

p-value

Motivation



2.33 ± 1.01 3.20 ± 1.11 <0.001 (2)

Ability


symbol on spread a

3.58 ± 1.18 4.09 ± 0.96 <0.001 (2)


symbol on spread b

0.96 ± 0.20 0.98 ± 0.15 0.169 (3)






40

4.4.2 Purchase intention of the product concepts

4.4.2.1 Purchase intention of calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing health claim

and symbol

Participants with higher level of purchase intention for calcium-enriched fruit juice

were more motivated to process the health claim or symbol on it (p < 0.001).

Purchase intention of this product concept was not associated with any aspect of

ability (subjective and objective understanding) (p > 0.05) (Table 28 and 29).

Table 28. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of calcium-enriched fruit

juice bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols

Purchase intention of

calcium-enriched fruit juice


Lower (1)

(n = 360)

Higher (1)

(n = 205)

p-value

Motivation



2.30 ± 1.06 2.97 ± 0.99 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on fruit juice a

4.16 ± 0.75 4.22 ± 0.69 0.323 (3)


on fruit juice b

0.59 ± 0.49 0.54 ± 0.50 0.304 (3)






41

Table 29. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of calcium-enriched fruit

juice bearing health symbol and their motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols


calcium-enriched fruit juice bearing


Lower (1)

(n = 379)

Higher (1)

(n = 186)

p-value

Motivation



2.31 ± 1.04 3.02 ± 1.00 <0.001 (2)

Ability



3.75 ± 1.21 3.77 ± 1.17 0.836 (3)



0.90 ± 0.88 0.88 ± 0.33 0.346 (3)






42

4.4.2.2 Purchase intention of fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing health

claim and symbol

The level of purchase intention was positively associated with motivation for

fibre-enriched breakfast cereals bearing health claim or symbol (p < 0.001). For the

one with health claim, there was also significant and positive association with

subjective understanding (p < 0.01), but not for objective understanding (p > 0.1)

(Table 30). Oppositely, the one bearing health symbol was significantly and positively

associated with objective understanding (p < 0.05) but not subjective understanding

(p > 0.1) (Table 31).

Table 30. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process



fibre-enriched breakfast cereals


Lower (1)

(n = 239)

Higher (1)

(n = 326)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on breakfast cereals s

1.96 ± 0.91 2.86 ± 1.04 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on breakfast cereals a

4.01 ± 0.87 4.21 ± 0.76 0.005 (3)


on breakfast cereals b

0.55 ± 0.50 0.52 ± 0.50 0.485 (3)






43

Table 31. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health symbol and their motivation and ability to process


Purchase intention of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals bearing health

symbol (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 253)

Higher (1)

(n = 312)

p-value

Motivation


and symbols on breakfast cereals a

2.00 ± 0.94 2.87 ± 1.04 <0.001 (2)

Ability


symbol on breakfast cereals a

3.65 ± 1.24 3.75 ± 1.23 0.334 (3)


symbol on breakfast cereals b

0.88 ± 0.33 0.94 ± 0.25 0.019 (3)






44

4.4.2.3 Purchase intention of omega-3-enriched spread bearing health claim and

symbol

The higher level of purchase intention for omega-3-enriched spread bearing health

claim or symbol was positively associated with motivation and subjective

understanding (p ≤ 0.001), but it was not significantly associated with objective

understanding for both health claim and symbol (p > 0.1) (Table 32 and 33).

Table 32. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of omega-3-enriched

spread bearing health claim and their motivation and ability to process health claims

and symbols



health claim (Mean ± SD)

Lower (1)

(n = 262)

Higher (1)

(n = 303)

p-value

Motivation



2.16 ± 1.01 3.01 ± 1.06 <0.001 (2)

Ability


on spread a

3.72 ± 1.02 4.06 ± 0.77 <0.001 (2)


on spread b

0.55 ± 0.50 0.52 ± 0.50 0.512 (3)






45

Table 33. Relations between consumers' purchase intention of omega-3-enriched

spread bearing health symbol and their motivation and ability to process health

claims and symbols




Lower (1)

(n = 283)

Higher (1)

(n = 282)

p-value

Motivation



2.19 ± 1.01 3.05 ± 1.06 <0.001 (2)

Ability


symbol on spread a

3.58 ± 1.21 3.91 ± 1.03 0.001 (2)


symbol on spread b

0.96 ± 0.19 0.96 ± 0.19 0.994 (3)






46

Table 34. Summary of findings regarding the association between consumers’ motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols, and

consumers' characteristics and reactions towards these claims and symbols

1 = Awareness of the link between diet and health 5 = Presence of diet-related medical history 9 = Following health regime

2 = Current usage of health claims and symbols 6 = Gender 10 = Role in the household

3 = Perception of validity 7 = Age 11 = General credibility of product concepts

4 = General familiarity with product concepts 8 = Education level 12 = General purchase intention of product concepts

X = Statistical tests showed significant association (p-value <0.05)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Significant association

Motivation

General motivation for processing health claims and symbols X X X X X X X X X X X

Motivation measured through product concepts X X X X X X X X X

Ability

General subjective knowledge about health claims and symbols X X X X X X X

Overall subjective understanding measured through product concepts X X X X X X X X X

Subjective understanding of health claims X X X X X X

Subjective understanding of health symbols X X X X X X X X X

Overall objective understanding X X X

Objective understanding of health claims X X X

Objective understanding of health symbols X X

47

4.5 Changes in consumers’ reactions towards health claims six years after

implementation of the Regulation

4.5.1 Perceived credibility of product concepts with health claims

The perceived credibility of all three product concepts with health claims did not

show statistically significant changes six years after the implementation of the

Regulation, according to the findings from the previous (Verbeke et al., 2009) and

follow-up studies (all p > 0.1) (Table 35).

Table 35. Changes in consumers' perceived credibility of product concepts bearing

health claims in follow-up study compared to the previous study

Perceived credibility of product concepts

with health claims (Mean ± SD)

Previous study

(N = 341)

Follow-up study

(N =565)

p-value

Perceived credibility of calcium-enriched

fruit juice with health claim a

2.97 ± 1.42 2.87 ± 0.98 0.192 (2)

Perceived credibility of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals with health claim a

3.38 ± 1.37 3.31 ± 0.95 0.111 (2)

Perceived credibility of omega-3

-enriched spread with health claim a

3.09 ± 1.37 3.08 ± 0.95 0.393 (2)

a Measured on a five-point interval scale: Not at all credible (=1), Slightly credible (=2), Somewhat

credible (=3), Moderately credible (=4), Extremely credible (=5)


4.5.2 Purchase intention of product concepts with health claims

Consumers have shown significantly lower purchase intention for all three product

concepts in the follow-up study (p < 0.001), compared to the previous study done six

years ago (Verbeke et al., 2009). Especially for calcium-enriched fruit juice with

health claim, there was the largest mean difference in two studies (Table 36).

48

Table 36. Changes in consumers' purchase intention of product concepts bearing

health claims in follow-up study compared to the previous study

Purchase intention of product concepts

with health claims (Mean ± SD)

Previous study

(N =341)

Follow-up study

(N =565)

p-value

Purchase intention of calcium-enriched

fruit juice with health claim a

2.90 ± 1.62 2.23 ± 1.05 <0.001 (2)

Purchase intention of fibre-enriched

breakfast cereals with health claim a

3.19 ± 1.55 2.70 ± 1.16 <0.001 (2)

Purchase intention of omega-3-enriched

spread with health claim a

3.06 ± 1.58 2.62 ± 1.15 <0.001 (2)

a Measured on a five-point interval scale: Not likely at all (=1), Slightly likely (=2), Somewhat likely (=3),

Moderately likely (=4), Extremely likely (=5)


4.5.3 Differences in socio-demographic characteristics of the samples in the

previous and follow-up study

The sample composition in the previous and follow-up studies was only significantly

different in age (p < 0.001), but not in gender and education level (p > 0.05). The

participants in follow-up study was older on average (Table 37).

Table 37. Differences in socio-demographic characteristics of the samples in the

previous and follow-up study

Differences in socio-demographic

characteristics of the samples

Previous study

(N = 341)

Follow-up study

(N = 565)

p-value(1)

Age in years old

(Mean ± SD)

37.37 ± 14.31 43.86 ± 14.74 <0.001

Gender

(Frequency %)

Male

Female

149 (43.8%)

191 (56.2%)

215 (38.1%)

350 (61.9%)

0.093

Education level a

(Frequency %)

Lower education b

Higher education b

113 (33.2%)

227 (66.8%)

175 (31.4%)

383 (68.6%)

0.606

a There were one missing in the previous study and six missing in the follow-up study

b Cut-off point was set at secondary education, ≤ secondary education was categorized as lower, and >

secondary education as higher

(1) Derived from Pearson Chi-Square (2-sided)

49

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION

This study aimed to get a realistic estimate of the levels of consumers' motivation

and ability to process health claims and symbols, and their relations with various

factors, as well as to serve as a follow-up study to illustrate the changes in

consumers' reactions to health claims in the last six years.

5.1 Consumers' motivation and ability to process health claims and symbols

The results showed that consumers were generally not highly motivated to process

health claims and symbols, no matter in general or product-specific, as suggested by

Gerrior (2010). In terms of ability, attributed to the extensive efforts of mass

communications through marketing activities or public health promotion

programmes, consumers expressed considerably high levels of knowledge and

understanding of health claims and symbols. However, the study sample of

volunteer participants might show different levels of subjective knowledge and

understanding than the general population (Cowburn & Stockley, 2005). Therefore,

the ability was studied in combination with a measurement of objective

understanding. In this study, consumers showed much higher objective

understanding of health symbols than of health claims. This finding was in line with

Cowburn & Stockley (2005), in which general consumers were able to correctly

locate and retrieve simple non-numerical information such as health symbols, but

they found technical wordings confusing, and did not truly understand the roles of

the food products or functional ingredients. Moreover, they could hardly

differentiate the subtle differences between the similar or related but actually

different technical wordings on health claims, which was also reported previously by

Trijp & van der Lans (2007).

5.1.1 Consumers' background attitudes

This study confirmed the findings of Armstrong et al. (2005) that consumers

generally reported to have high awareness of the link between diet and health. The

group of consumers with the highest awareness was also more motivated to process

health claims and symbols as according to Vyth et al. (2010), they perceived

themselves to have more knowledge and a higher understanding, as they might be

more interested and have processed more information as such.

The reported current usage was considerably low. Grunert and Wills (2007) found

that the reported use of health-related information tended to be higher than the

actual use, so the actual usage of health claims and symbols is expected to be quite

50

low. This could be due to the lack of motivation, which was related to the usage, and

it was reported as an important barrier impeding the usage of health-related

information (EUFIC, 2012). Lower usage was also significantly associated with lower

subjective knowledge, as subjective knowledge is an important predictor for

consumers' behaviour such as information processing and, further on, for food

choices (Verbeke, 2008).

Consumers who perceived functional foods as marketing scam tended to be less

favourable towards the products bearing claims (Verbeke et al., 2009). Perception of

health-related information as marketing gimmicks was a strong predictor of low

motivation to process health-related information (Bech-Larsen & Grunert, 2003;

Bech-Larsen & Scholderer, 2007).

Although it was not the main focus of this study, the results showed that not many

consumers were aware of or familiar with the legislation imposed on health claims

and symbols. Although health claims are stringently regulated and standardized,

while health symbols are not (European Commission, 2007), the majority of the

consumers in this study tended to perceive health claims as marketing gimmicks

instead of information that is strictly regulated.

5.1.2 Familiarity

Consumers expressed the highest familiarity with omega-3-enriched spread among

the three product concepts, which could be due to massive marketing activities with

the high availability of functional spread products on the market (van Kleef et al.,

2005). Consumers who were more familiar with product concepts reported to be

more motivated to process the health claims and symbols on the products. However,

a number of studies showed that consumers claimed to be more motivated when

they were unfamiliar with the products (Cowburn & Stockley, 2005), and early

studies reported higher levels of information processing occurring at moderate

product familiarity levels (Moorman, 1990).

Further analysis of consumers’ ability to process health-related information

confirmed the early findings. Increased product familiarity made consumers perceive

themselves as more able to process information. This raised the level of subjective

knowledge and perceived understanding (Moorman, 1990). However, it was not

related to the actual acquisition, comprehension and elaboration of the information,

so the level of objective understanding was not associated with familiarity (Park et

al., 1994). Besides, when consumers felt being more informed than they really were,

they tended to reduce processing, resulting in less actual information acquisition and

comprehension (Moorman, 1990).

51


The results were generally consistent with previous findings, that females, and main

shoppers for food in households were more motivated to process health-related

information (Grunert et al., 2010; Krystallis, et al. 2008; Urala, 2005; Yoon & George,

2012), as females were generally more interested in healthy eating and health

(Bogue & Ryan, 2000; Childs & Poryzees, 1997) and main shoppers could be more

likely to feel responsible for food choices and consumption of household members.

Besides, consumers who were following health regimes and who have been

confronted with diet-related health problems were also more motivated, as they

were more likely to find health-related information more personally relevant (Dean

et al., 2012; Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013). Grunert et al. (2010) found that gender was

not related to understanding, but females showed significantly higher subjective and

objective understanding than males in this study, which could be due to the higher

interest in healthy eating among females (Krystallis, et al., 2008), leading them to

actively search for or learn about health-related information.

With regard to age, the results were also generally in line with previous studies.

Older consumers were more motivated as they tended to have increased health

concerns (Yoon, & George, 2012). However, their levels of subjective and objective

understanding were lower than those of younger consumers (Yoon, & George, 2012).

As suggested by Moorman (1990), aging worsened their actual comprehension levels

of the information.

Some previous studies showed that consumers with a higher education level tended

to be more motivated and use health-related information more often (Anttolainen et

al., 2001; de Jong et al., 2004), while some showed the opposite, because the more

educated consumers may have thought that they had sufficient knowledge already

and were less motivated to search for additional information (Moorman, 1990). This

study found no significant relation between education level and motivation. The

more educated group showed a much higher objective understanding of health

claims, as according to Grunert et al. (2010). However, the more educated

consumers did not perceive themselves to have a higher understanding of the health

claims. Moorman (1990) suggested that education could increase knowledge, which

might as well increase awareness of what the consumers do not know, so that they

would rate themselves lower in terms of knowledge and understanding.

52

5.1.4 Relation between motivation and ability

The results were somewhat contrary to the expectations, but generally in line with

the findings of Moorman (1990), and Petty and Cacioppo (1986). Consumers'

motivation was positively associated with consumers' perceived ability to process

health claims and symbols, as reported by Moorman (1990). Generally, the ability

was reported to be higher when the consumers had a higher level of motivation as

well as the other way around (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Moorman, 1990). The

reciprocal effects of motivation and ability was also reported by Lutz et al. (1983).

Contrarily, this study found that the objective understanding of health claims and

symbols was not related to the level of motivation.

5.2 Consumers’ reactions towards health claims and symbols

The results concerning consumers' reactions confirmed the findings from previous

studies. Consumers' perceived credibility of health claims and symbols and purchase

intention for the corresponding functional food products both differed across

different claim–carrier combinations, as reported previously (van Kleef et al., 2005;

Verbeke et al., 2009). Cereals enriched with dietary fibre received the highest

perceived credibility and purchase intention, as it was a product commonly

considered as healthy, with a natural and familiar type of enrichment (Verbeke et al.,

2009). Omega-3-enriched spreads received medium level of perceived credibility,

and similarly high level of purchase intention to what fibre-enriched cereals received,

although it was a potentially less healthy product, probably because of the strong

health reputation of omega-3 established in recent years (Verbeke et al., 2009). Fruit

juice enriched with calcium received the lowest perceived credibility and purchase

intention, even though it was commonly perceived as a healthy product enriched

with the well-known qualifying nutrient (Grunert & Wills, 2007), as it was considered

a less natural combination which induced scepticism and more negative evaluations

of the claim–carrier combination (Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013).

5.2.1 Relation to motivation and ability

In this study, consumers' motivation and subjective understanding were found to be

positively related to their perceived credibility and purchase intention in general.

Previous studies were not consistent in that regard. It was reported that consumers'

motivation was positively influenced by a higher perceived credibility of

health-related information and the types of information involved (Krystallis et al.,

2008). Yoon & George (2012) found that higher level of motivation and higher level

of subjective understanding lowered purchase intention, as the functional food

items were evaluated more unfavourably. Besides, when consumers’ subjective

53

knowledge and understanding was mainly the result of low trusted information

sources, such as mass-media coverage in the form of advertising (Verbeke, 2008),

the increase of this resulting subjective understanding was expected to lower

perceived credibility and purchase intention. In contrast, other studies showed that a

higher level of subjective understanding was positively associated with perceived

credibility and purchase intention (Urala & Lähteenmäki, 2004 ; Urala & Lähteenmäki,

2007).

5.3 The change of consumers' reactions six years after the implementation of EC

Regulation 1924/2006

The results indicated that there were no significant changes in perceived credibility,

but a decrease in purchase intention of product concepts compared to the previous

study (Verbeke et al., 2009). The sample of this follow-up study comprised older

participants on average. The results were contrary to the expectations, as credibility

was reported to be higher in younger age groups (Verbeke et al., 2009), and

purchase intention was higher in older age groups (Poulsen, 1999). The inconsistent

findings confirmed the conclusion of Verbeke et al. (2009), which stated that

socio-demographic background played a relatively minor role in consumers'

reactions. Consumers' reactions are influenced by various factors. Hoefkens and

Verbeke (2013) suggested that even consumers who had evaluated product

credibility positively may not intend to purchase the functional foods. Therefore, it

poses difficulties for functional food industries targeting particular market segments

(Verbeke, 2005; Verbeke et al., 2009).

The decrease in purchase intention could be the result of massive mass-media

coverage from low trusted information sources such as advertisements (Verbeke,

2008), causing consumers to perceive functional food products with health claims as

pure marketing gimmicks, undifferentiated from non-functional products without

health claims. Meanwhile, as a functional food market has been established for years,

consumers might have tried some of the products, yet they could not simply observe

or feel the health benefits (Caswell & Mojduszka, 1996), which could lower their

purchase intention.

5.4 Practical implications

The availability of correct health-related information from a scientific perspective is

only part of the solution for improved food choices. The success of the attempts to

improve food choices mainly depends on consumers' perceptions and behaviour

(Hieke & Taylor, 2012; Grunert & Wills, 2007; Moorman, 1990). Consumers need to

54

be motivated to process the information, truly understand the health benefits stated

and find it relevant to their personal health (Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013).

Several implications can be drawn for both policymakers and food industries.

Currently, the Regulation focuses heavily on the context of claims such as wordings,

and distinction between claim types (van Trijp & van der Lans, 2007). However, the

results indicated a lack of correspondence between the Regulation, consumers'

perceptions and behaviour, and the actual market experiences. It puts in question

consumers’ awareness of this legislation and their behaviour towards this

scientifically-sound information, as well as the potential for this Regulation to

enlarge the European functional food market (Bech-Larsen & Scholderer, 2007). This

implies that more efforts in communication may be needed to inform consumers

about the existence and extent of this Regulation, and in education to establish

better consumer understanding of the links between nutrients and health-benefits.

For food industries, an important consideration is that additional and usually large

investments are required to obtain regulatory approval for health claims, yet, there

is no guarantee that the outcomes would be appealing enough. For health symbols,

though regulatory approval is not needed at this moment, food industries should

also take into account that consumers are generally sceptical about and not highly

motivated to process the health-related information on food products, so the

additional information as such on food products does not necessarily improve appeal

to consumers.

5.5 Limitations of the study and future research

The first limitation pertains to the claim or symbol-carrier combinations, with which

only three product concepts were evaluated. The health claims on product concepts

only included the enrichment of “positive” or qualifying nutrients, but no reduction

or omission of “negative” or disqualifying nutrients. Besides, there was a particular

active ingredient mentioned in every health claim example, but there were other

ingredients which give the same health benefits available in the market (e.g. other

than calcium, Vitamin D also contributes to the maintenance of normal bones (as

approved by EFSA)). Urala et al. (2003) reported that different active ingredients

might differ in terms of consumers' attitudes and familiarity, which could in turn

influence their perceptions of claims (van Trijp & van der Lans, 2007). Therefore, the

results of this study could neither be generalized to other food categories nor ones

with different symbols or different formulation of health claims (Verbeke et al.,

2009). It may be interesting for future studies to investigate different products,

different formulation of claims (e.g. different wordings or presentation format) and

symbols (e.g. different graphic or visual presentations) (Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013).

55

Secondly, this study investigated the general population in Flanders, Belgium. Only

basic personal information was recorded from the subjects, i.e. up to the presence of

a diet-related medical history (see Survey in Appendix A). It did not account for

consumer groups with different socio-cultural backgrounds, or with particular

interests in functional foods (Pieniak et al., 2008). Owing to the regional scope and

specific characteristics of the study sample, generalisation to a wider population are

speculative.

Finally, a web-based survey with no real products or shopping settings was employed.

A hypothetical situation was created, in which consumers might have different

contexts in mind while evaluating the given product concepts. The design of this

study did not test interaction effects between different packaging designs, labelling,

brands, corporate images, etc. Besides, this study relied on self-reported data, as

most consumer research studies did. This provides valuable insights, but is often

subject to social desirability bias resulting in an under/over-reporting of the actual

behaviour (Fisher, 1993). Hence, observational and experimental studies are

recommended in the future, incorporating the use of real product settings and

shopping environments (Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013), which enables the investigation

of potential interactions between different packaging designs, labelling, wordings or

visual presentations of health-related information, brands, corporate images, etc.

(van Trijp & van der Lans, 2007).

56

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION

Consumers' motivation and perceived ability to process health claims and symbols

were found to be correlated, and they were in general associated with various

consumers' characteristics, including their awareness of the link between diet and

health, perceptions and use of health claims and symbols, familiarity with specific

functional foods, socio-demographic background and diet-related medical history, as

well as their reactions, in terms of perceived credibility and purchase intention, to

functional foods bearing health claims or symbols. However, their ability in terms of

objective understanding was not related to motivation, consumers' reactions or

other characteristics, but only associated with socio-demographic background (see

Table 34 for summary).

Six years after the implementation of the Regulation, consumers have showed a

lower intention to purchase the functional products bearing health claims, which

could be due to the increased scepticism caused by the lack of correspondence

between the Regulation, consumers' perceptions and behaviour, and actual market

experiences. This has important implications for both policymakers and food

industries. Improved communication and education could be one of the essential

steps to align consumers' behaviour with the Regulation and its objectives through

changing their actual knowledge and perceptions. When there is no guaranteed

return from consumers, additional consideration would be recommended for food

industries to estimate if it remains worthwhile to invest extensively for placing this

health-related information on their functional food products.

57

REFERENCES

American Dietetic Association. (2006). Food and nutrition misinformation. Journal of the

American Dietetic Association, 106, 601-607.

American Dietetic Association. (2010). Functional foods: consumer attitudes, perceptions,

and behaviors in a growing market. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 111, 804 -

810.

Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2011). Functional foods development in the European market:

A consumer perspective. Journal of Functional foods, 3, 223-228.

Anttolainen, M., Luoto, R., Uutela, A., Boice, J. D., Blot, W. J., McLaughlin, J. K., & Puska, P.

(2001). Characteristics of users and nonusers of plant stanol ester margarine in Finland: An

approach to study functional foods. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101,

1365–1368.

Ares, G., & Gambaro, A. (2007). Influence of gender, age and motives underlying food choice

on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods. Appetite, 49, 148–158.

Armstrong, G., Farley, H., Gray, J. & Durkin, M. (2005) Marketing health-enhancing foods:

implications from the dairy sector. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 23, 705–719.

Bech-Larsen, T., & Grunert, K. (2003). The perceived healthiness of functional foods: a

conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers’ perception on functional foods.

Appetite, 40, 9–14.

Bech-Larsen, T., & Scholderer, J. (2007). Functional foods in Europe: consumer research,

market experiences and regulatory aspects. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 18,

231–234.

Bogue, J., & Ryan, M. (2000). Market-oriented new product development: Functional foods

and the Irish consumer. Agribusiness Discussion Paper 27. Department of food economics.

Ireland: National University of Ireland.

Brucks, M. (1985). The effects of product class knowledge on information search behavior.

Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 1-16.

Caswell, J. A., & Mojduszka, E. M. (1996). Using informational labelling to influence the

market for quality in food products. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78,

1248–1253.

Childs, N. M., & Poryzees, G. H. (1997). Foods that help prevent disease: Consumer attitudes

and public policy implications. British Food Journal, 9, 419–426.

Cowburn, G., & Stockley, L. (2005) Consumer understanding and use of nutrition labelling: a

systematic review. Public Health Nutrition, 8, 21–28.

58

Dean, M., Lampila. P., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Saba, A., Vassallo, M., Claupein, E.,

Winkelmann, M., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2012). Perceived relevance and foods with

health-related claims. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 129-135.

de Jong, N., Simojoki, M., Laatikainen, T., Tapanainen, H., Valsta, L., Lahti-Koski, M. (2004).

The combined use of cholesterollowering drugs and cholesterol lowering bread spreads:

Health behaviour data from Finland. Preventive Medicine, 39, 849–855.

Drichoutis, A. C., Lazaridis, P., & Nayga Jr., R. M. (2005). Nutrition knowledge and consumer

use of nutritional food labels. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 32, 93–118.

EUFIC. (2012). New insights into nutrition labelling in Europe. EU Projects Supplement for

FLABEL. Retrieved from http://www.eufic.org/article/en/artid/New-insights-into-nutrition

-labelling-in-Europe/

European Commission. (2007). Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament

and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods.

Official Journal of the European Union, L 12/3–L 12/18.

Fisher, R.J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of

Consumer Research, 20, 303–315.

Gerrior, S. (2010). A nutrient profiling systems: are science and the consumer connected?

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 91, 1116-1117.

Gilsenan, M.B. (2011). Nutrition & health claims in the European Union: A regulatory

overview. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22, 536-542.

Grunert, K., & Wills, J. (2007). A review of European research on consumer response to

nutrition information on food labels. Journal of Public Health, 15, 385–399.

Grunert, K. G., Wills, J. M., & Fernandez-Celemin L. (2010). Nutrition knowledge, and use and

understanding of nutrition information on food labels among consumers in the UK. Appetite,

55, 177-189.

Hieke, S., & Taylor, C. R. (2012). A critical review of the literature on nutrition labelling.

Journal of Consumer Affairs, 46, 120-156.

Hoefkens, C. & Verbeke, W. (2013). Consumers’ health-related motive orientations and

reactions to claims about dietary calcium. Nutrients, 5, 82-96.

Hooker, N. H., & Teratanavat, R. (2008). Dissecting qualified health claims: evidence from

experimental studies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 48, 160–176.

Kanwar, R., Grund, L., & Olson, J. C. (1990). When Do the Measures of Knowledge Measure

What We Think They Are Measuring? Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 603-608.

Kardes, F. R., Posavac, S. S, & Cronley, M. L. (2004). Consumer inference: a review of

processes, bases, and judgment contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 230–256.

59

Krystallis, A., Maglaras, G., & Mamalis, S. (2008). Motivations and cognitive structures of

consumers in their purchasing of functional foods. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 525-538.

Lutz, R. J., MacKenzie, S.B., & Belch, G. E. (1983). Attitude toward the ad as a mediator of

advertising effectiveness: determinants and consequences. Advances in Consumer Research,

10, 532-539.

Maclnnis, D. J., Moorman, C., & Jaworski, B. J. (1991). Enhancing and measuring consumers'

motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from ads. Journal of

Marketing, 55, 32-53.

Moorman, C. (1990). The effects of stimulus and consumer characteristics on the utilization

of nutrition information. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 362–374.

Niva, M. (2007). ‘All foods affect health’: Understandings of functional foods and healthy

eating among health-oriented Finns. Appetite, 48, 384–393.

Park, C. W., Mothersbaugh, D. L., & Feick, L. (1994). Consumer Knowledge Assessment.

Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 71-82.

Patch, C., Williams, P. G., & Tapsell, L. (2005). Attitudes and intentions toward purchasing

novel foods enriched with omega-3 fatty acids. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior,

37, 235–241.

Petty, R. W., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: central and peripheral

routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

Pieniak, Z., Verbeke, W., Perez-Cueto, F., Brunsø, K., & De Henauw, S. (2008). Fish

consumption and its motives in households with versus without self-reported medical

history of CVD: a consumer survey from five European countries. BMC Public Health, 8, 306.

Poulsen, J. B. (1999). Danish consumers’ attitudes towards functional foods. Working paper

62. Denmark: The Arhus School of Business.

Rao, & Wanda, A. S. (1992). The effect of prior knowledge on price acceptability and the type

of information examined. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 256-270.

Schiffman, L. G., Lazarkanuk, L. & Hansen, H. (2008). Credibility. Consumer Behaviour: A

Global Outlook. England: Pearson Education.

Siro, I., Kapolna, E., Kapolna, B., & Lugasi, A. (2008). Functional food. Product development,

marketing and consumer acceptance. Appetite, 51, 456–467.

SPSS Inc. (2012). SPSS Software, version 20.1. Chicago, IL, USA: IBM SPSS Inc.

Teratanavat, R., & Hooker, N. H. (2006). Consumer valuations and preference heterogeneity

for a novel functional food. Journal of Food Science, 71, 533–541.

Urala, N., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2004). Attitudes behind consumer’s willingness to use

functional foods. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 793–803.

60

Urala, N., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2006). Hedonic ratings and perceived healthiness in

experimental functional food choices. Appetite, 47, 302–314.

Urala, N., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2007). Consumers’ changing attitudes towards functional foods.

Food Quality and Preference, 18, 1–12.

van Kleef, E., van Trijp, H. C. M., & Luning, P. (2005). Functional foods: health claim-food

product compatibility and the impact of health claim framing on consumer evaluation.

Appetite, 44, 299–308.

van Trijp, H. C. M., & van der Lans, I. A. (2007). Consumer perceptions of nutrition and health

claims. Appetite, 48, 305–324.

Verbeke, W. (2005). Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Sociodemographic, cognitive

and attitudinal determinants. Food Quality and Preference, 16, 45–57.

Verbeke, W. (2008). Impact of communication on consumers' food choices. Proceedings of

the Nutrition Society, 67, 281-288.

Verbeke, W. (2010). Consumer reactions to foods with nutrition and health claims. Agro

Food industry hi-tech, 21, 5-8.

Verbeke, W., Scholderer, J., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2009). Consumer appeal of nutrition and

health claims in three existing product concepts. Appetite, 52, 684–692.

Vyth, E. L., Steenhuis, L. H. M, , Vlot, J. A., Wulp1, W. A., Hogenes, M. A., Looije, D. H., Brug, J.,

& Seidell, J. C. (2010). Actual use of a front-of-pack nutrition logo in the supermarket,

consumers' motives in food choice. Public Health Nutrition, 13, 1-8.

Whitlar, D.B., Geurts, M.D., & Swenson, M.J. (1993). New product forecasting with a

purchase intention survey. The Journal of Business Forecasting Methods Systems and

Systems, 12, 1-18.

Williams, P. G. (2005). Consumer understanding and use of health claims for foods, Nutrition

Reviews, 63, 256-264.

Williams, P. G., Ridges, L., Batterham, M., Ripper, B., & Hung, M. C. (2008). Australian

consumer attitudes to health claim—food product compatibility for functional foods. Food

Policy, 33, 640–643.

Yoon., H. J., & George, T. (2012). Nutritional information disclosure on the menu

International. Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 1187– 1194.

Zimmer, J.C., Arsal, R., Al-Marzouq, M., Moore, D., & Grover, V. (2010). Knowing your

customers: Using a reciprocal relationship to enhance voluntary information disclosure.

Decision Support Systems, 48, 395–406.

Documents

Consumer motivation and ability to process health claims